From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richman v. Richman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1984
104 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

October 15, 1984

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Geiler, J.).


Order reversed, insofar as appealed from, with costs, and case remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for an immediate hearing and new determination.

Plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, for a divorce, alleging cruel and inhuman treatment on the part of defendant. Specifically, plaintiff alleged that defendant had left him for another man on September 19, 1983. In her answer, defendant admitted cohabitation with the other man She also counter-claimed for divorce. The record indicates that approximately two weeks after defendant's departure from the marital residence, the two minor children of the parties moved in with defendant. There is no indication in the record that plaintiff objected at that time to the transfer of custody.

Defendant moved for various pendente lite relief including an award of temporary legal custody of the children. Plaintiff cross-moved in response for custody of the children. Special Term, without holding a hearing, awarded temporary custody to plaintiff. In its memorandum decision, the court failed to set forth its reasons for transferring custody.

Generally speaking, priority in a custody dispute should be given to the first parent who was awarded custody in litigation or by voluntary agreement (see Matter of Nehra v Uhlar, 43 N.Y.2d 242). Of course, the court's primary concern should always be the best interests of the child (see Matter of Lincoln v Lincoln, 24 N.Y.2d 270). A subsequent change in custody should, at the very least, follow a full hearing in which all relevant aspects of the matter are considered and weighed by the court (see Obey v Degling, 37 N.Y.2d 768; Matter of Mitchell v Mitchell, 67 A.D.2d 924). Here, it appears that plaintiff initially agreed that the children should live with defendant and the children were living with the defendant. Special Term should not have thereafter transferred custody without a hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the order, insofar as appealed from, and remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for an immediate hearing and new determination. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Richman v. Richman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1984
104 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Richman v. Richman

Case Details

Full title:MORTON RICHMAN, Respondent, v. DEBORAH RICHMAN, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 15, 1984

Citations

104 A.D.2d 934 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Robert v. Victoria

The court should not have transferred custody of the infant child from the wife to the husband on the basis…

White v. Mazzella-White

The best interests of the children are determined by a review of the totality of the circumstances ( see…